Santarsiero et al.v.Santarsiero et al. V. Santarsiero et al. V. Santarsiero et al. V. DeLucas V. Santarsiero et al.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Feb 22, 2007

09336134 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 22, 2007)

Paper 92
Filed by Motions Panel Filed: 22 February 2007
Mail Stop Interference
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Tel: 571-272-9797
Fax: 571-273-0042

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_______________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_______________
BERNARD D. SANTARSIERO,
RAYMOND C. STEVENS,
PETER G. SCHULTZ, JOSEPH M. JAKLEVIC,
DEREK T. YEGIAN, EARL CORNELL, ROBERT A. NORDMEYER,
JIAN JIN, WILLIAM F. KOLBE, ARTHUR L. JONES, DONALD C. UBER1
Junior Party,
(Patents 6,296,673, 6,630,006, 6,911,056, 6,932,845,
6,951,575, and 7,001,438),
v.
LAWRENCE JAMES DELUCAS,
Senior Party,
(Application 10/160,572).
_______________
Patent Interference No. 105,403
_______________
Judgment — Merits — Bd.R. 127
Before Hanlon, Lane, and Nagumo, Administrative Patent
Judges.

Nagumo, Administrative Patent Judge.

In view of the Board's Decision in Paper 91 and for
the reasons given, it is:

1 Jin, Kolbe, Jones, and Uber are listed inventors only for patent
6,296,673. The remaining inventors are listed on all of Santarsiero's
involved patents.
Interference 105,403 Paper 92
Santarsiero v. DeLucas

-2-
ORDERED that Bernard D. Santarsiero, Raymond C.
Stevens, Peter G. Schultz, Joseph M. Jaklevic, Derek T.
Yegian, Earl Cornell, Robert A. Nordmeyer, Jian Jin,
William F. Kolbe, Arthur L. Jones, Donald C. Uber are not
entitled to a patent containing:
claims 1-59 of U.S. Patent 6,296,673.
FURTHER ORDERED that Bernard D. Santarsiero,
Raymond C. Stevens, Peter G. Schultz, Joseph M. Jaklevic,
Derek T. Yegian, Earl Cornell, and Robert A. Nordmeyer are
not entitled to a patent containing:
claims 1-84 of U.S. Patent 6,630,006;
claims 1–62 of U.S. Patent 6,911,056;
claims 1-118 of U.S. Patent 6,932,845;
claims 1-42 of U.S. Patent 6,951,575;
claims 1—82 of U.S. Patent 7,001,438.
FURTHER ORDERED that Lawrence James DeLucas is
not entitled to a patent to claims 47 and 48 of Application
10/160,572.
FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this judgment
shall be entered in the records of:
U.S. Patent 6,296,673,
U.S. Patent 6,630,006,
U.S. Patent 6,911,056,
U.S. Patent 6,932,845,
Interference 105,403 Paper 92
Santarsiero v. DeLucas

-3-
U.S. Patent 6,951,575,
U.S. Patent 7,001,438, and
U.S. application 10/160,572.
FURTHER ORDERED that in the event of a
settlement, the attentions of the parties are drawn to 35
U.S.C. § 135(c) and Bd.R. 205.

/Adriene Lepiane Hanlon/ )
ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
/Sally Gardner Lane/ ) BOARD OF PATENT
SALLY GARDNER LANE ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
/Mark Nagumo/ )
MARK NAGUMO )
Administrative Patent Judge )

Interference 105,403 Paper 92
Santarsiero v. DeLucas

-4-

cc via electronic mail:

Attorney for SANTARSIERO:

John A. Bauer, Esq.
Bruce J. Koch, Esq.
FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI LLP
666 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10103
jbauer@fulbright.com
bkoch@fulbright.com

Attorney for DELUCAS:

R. Danny Huntington, Esq.
Sharon E. Crane, Ph.D., Esq.
BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP
2020 K. Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1806
huntington@bingham.com
crane@bingham.com